- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 15:55:46 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 20/04/2017 15:44, David MacDonald wrote: > So a font icon that passes 2.1 would look something like this: > > <i class="fa fa-myfont" role="img" aria-hidden="true"></i><span > class="sr-text>replacement</span> ONLY if the style sheet used for testing explicitly included a style rule that did NOT change the font for anything with a role="img". And I'd argue that this type of exemption can't be made, as that relies purely on following a non-normative technique suggestion. My hardline view here is that icon fonts in general do not withstand generic font replacement on the part of the user. The test should not try to special-case these sorts of non-standard constructs, as they'd only work in the real world if all users/font switchers also implemented the suggested style selector special-casing these constructs. P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Thursday, 20 April 2017 14:56:17 UTC